Musk is probably right unless ULA has a massive existential crisis over F9 and FH re-usability. BE4 had first light 10/17, with the way ULA has operated since inception there's no way they get from first test stand firing to useful NRO payload in less than 6 years.

Unfortunately, it doesn't look like Spacex has any serious competition.

If Bezos is serious about BO then they'll be a serious competitor. He's following a similar design philosophy to SpaceX and has the deep pockets to fund and even pay for accelerated development if that's what he wants.

What was the reasoning for Doug Ellison at the JPL saying the Delta IV could outperform the FH? It looks like the Heavy can lift vastly more. I can't find the exact analysis (because Twitter is awful and I hate it).

I'm pleased to learn the cost of a fully expendable Falcon Heavy launch. Everyone was quoting a cost of $90 million, but that appears to have been based on some sort of odds-based pro-rating of the discount from the reusability. It's good to know that it's still relatively cheap even if the recovery stages all go wrong.

It is interesting that Musk caveated his hat eating comment with "national security payload" given that the discussion was beyond earth orbit capabilities.

I wonder if he is hedging his bets. New Glen should (in theory) be flying before 2023 however Blue Origin has no interest in carrying national security payloads and at least so far no interest in even getting EELV certified.

What was the reasoning for Doug Ellison at the JPL saying the Delta IV could outperform the FH? It looks like the Heavy can lift vastly more. I can't find the exact analysis (because Twitter is awful and I hate it).

The argument was that the Delta IV Heavy's cryogenic upper stage allows it to be much more effective for high delta-V missions to the outer solar system. In principle, the Falcon Heavy could also gain an enhanced second stage (and in a later tweet in the thread that Eric was referencing, Elon mentioned the possibility of a stretched second stage), but using kerosene in the second stage (as the Falcon rockets do) does impose some inherent limitations compared to hydrogen or even methane second stages.

This makes a ton of sense. Elon has been very very open about his desire for a "new space race" because he thinks it's good for development overall, and an accelerant to the dawn of true space travel. What's cheaper at starting a space race than smack talk? It's definitely less than the billions of dollars thrown into one-off displays of capability that the Soviets and US engaged in during the Cold War. Clearly Musk is thinking strategically here... Or maybe he's hangry, who knows?

I'm pleased to learn the cost of a fully expendable Falcon Heavy launch. Everyone was quoting a cost of $90 million, but that appears to have been based on some sort of odds-based pro-rating of the discount from the reusability. It's good to know that it's still relatively cheap even if the recovery stages all go wrong.

Yeah it was what I was ballparking but it is nice to have an official (well as official as twitter can get) number on it. That would mean expending the center core should be something on the order of $110M.

It is interesting that Musk caveated his hat eating comment with "national security payload" given that the discussion was beyond earth orbit capabilities.

I wonder if he is hedging his bets. New Glen should (in theory) be flying before 2023 however Blue Origin has no interest in carrying national security payloads and at least so far no interest in even getting EELV certified.

not sure where New Glen came from. The bet is for the Vulcan launching something.

What was the reasoning for Doug Ellison at the JPL saying the Delta IV could outperform the FH? It looks like the Heavy can lift vastly more. I can't find the exact analysis (because Twitter is awful and I hate it).

It lifts more to LEO (a lot more) but the gap closes even going to GTO. The higher energy the final orbit the more important the efficiency of the upper stage (specific impulse) matters. The D4H has an impressively efficient upper stage.

The FH also has a pretty high dry mass for an upper stage. Remember in the rocket equation. The final mass isn't the payload it is the payload plus final stage. The relatively low performance and high dry mass start to limit what the FH can do in very high energy orbits.

It is interesting that Musk caveated his hat eating comment with "national security payload" given that the discussion was beyond earth orbit capabilities.

I wonder if he is hedging his bets. New Glen should (in theory) be flying before 2023 however Blue Origin has no interest in carrying national security payloads and at least so far no interest in even getting EELV certified.

not sure where New Glen came from. The bet is for the Vulcan launching something.

Oops my bad I thought he said ANY rocket. Still the caveat on national security payload seems strange given what they are talking about unless Elon knows something we don't about national security threats in deep space.

I'm pleased to learn the cost of a fully expendable Falcon Heavy launch. Everyone was quoting a cost of $90 million, but that appears to have been based on some sort of odds-based pro-rating of the discount from the reusability. It's good to know that it's still relatively cheap even if the recovery stages all go wrong.

Yeah it was what I was ballparking but it is nice to have an official (well as official as twitter can get) number on it. That would mean expending the center core should be something on the order of $110M.

In another tweet in that thread, Elon said that a two-ASDS, expended-center-core Heavy mission should cost around $95 million. Which seems low, compared to $90 million for a two-RTLS, one-ASDS Heavy mission, but it's his rocket, he should know.

Also, that thread confirmed that a second ASDS is in the works for the East Coast range (third ASDS total). It will be named "A Shortfall of Gravitas", which actually isn't a Culture Ship name, because Elon apparently decided to rephrase "Experiencing A Significant Gravitas Shortfall" (which is a Culture Ship name) to make it a little easier to discuss.

Edit: Added in the "millions," but what's six orders of magnitude among friends?

Obviously Tony Bruno would love to get the PR win of asking for proof that Elon ate his hat ... but he has a mountain to climb if he wants it.

The main challenge as I see it is that ULA isn't really trying to deliver to a schedule. They've been rolling gently along, enjoying all the side benefits of Cost+ contracting and making money, with a general idea that they'll get there some day...

Now, ULA only has about 3,600 employees, which means that there are lots of other partners and sub-contractors involved. No idea how many different organizations.

It's tough enough to re-focus one company into a performance-based mindset when everyone there is entrenched on a culture of "slow and steady earns most profits"... so trying to do this for all the trickle-down providers as well might prove interesting.

At first look, this seems to be a pretty safe bet for Elon. What do others think?